As I recall it the comment by Peter was a bit more nuanced in...

As I recall it the comment by Peter was a bit more nuanced in that as you say he was unsure as whether information requested by a questioner as to non-sustaining costs were greater or less than the margin between gold sold/ozs and AISC - i.e were they cash flow positive of not based upon current production. Peter referred the matter to the rest of the board and David Quinlivan indicated that they were very close but since that information had not been formally disclosed could not say whether they were cash flow positive. The questioner then made a comment to the effect that it was important for investors to know whether "they were washing their face" since that could have a significant impact of sentiment towards the company.